Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the
world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to
over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a
wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history,
humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced
features available, you will need to register first. Registration is
absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

I am sure this has been done on the forum somewhere but I haven't found it. I was wondering if someone could do a side by side comparison in teaching methodology and resulting changes in the body between the major IS/IP teaching groups, Dan Harden, Aunkai, Mike Sigman and I Liq Chuan. We have a small group on the Big Island that study with Dan (Whom I unfortunately haven't met yet) and the changes they have made are quite amazing. I met Sam Chin Sifu here a couple of months ago and was knocked off my feet( Literally!). He showed us some things to practice (Rocking, Absorb/project) and I have been trying to incorporate that into my training. My only exposure to Mike Sigman has been his dvd (Nice!) and his writings here and on his blog. I recently got the Aunkai dvd and been trying the exercises (Tenshijin just kills my back!) for a little bit.

Our group doesn't get together much due to work and such. I wanted to try and work on this on my own for a bit. I just wanted to see the comparisons and contrasts between these groups.

I too work both ILC and Dan's Ueshiba Aiki and got introduced to this whole area via purchasing Aunkai DVDs. I'm to much of a newb to really comment on similarities and differences but here goes - not so much as specific methodology, but just things I've recognized.

disclaimer alert - I'm newb so what I write below is probably wrong!

First off in terms of feeling I see a lot of overlap between Sifu Chin and Dan, but now that I'm learning I'm not to surprised by this.

Terminology - you have to be careful cause I think Sam and Dan say the same thing but in different ways and when attending seminars I want to avoid confusing two methodologies. For example Dan talks of opening & closing the body and the exercise is a stretching/removing the slack of the myofascial system to feel the connection to dantien. In ILC I find this to be the Expand & Condense exercise. Whereas in ILC opening & closing refers to the relationship of the wrist/elbow to the shoulder line.

Next for me is my overall martial goal. I've done Japanese weapons work in the past, but its not my thing. I've heard Dan speak to applying the Ueshiba Aiki work to Koryu weapons work. Dan and Sam are both experienced empty hand fighters, but my interest and background in kempo/grappling/boxing make me embrace the ILC system more and you'll find ILC guys going out and competing so working with them adds to the learning ladder for me. From my brief conversation with Dan, he's an MMA guy before there was MMA but most of the local guys practicing his exercises are in Aikido dojos and so the direction is focused there.

Regarding Aunkai, be careful with the exercises. There are details not explained in the DVDs. Fortunately there are a couple guys in Seattle who hosted Ark in the past and explained some of them to me. If Tenshijin is killing your back I'd be concerned you're doing something wrong - i.e. not stopping at a body limit and letting you're structure stretch and slowly adapt. but I could be mistaken.

I haven't attended a Mike Sigman seminar, but don't intend to - my plate is full of good stuff as it is!
my 2 cents worth!

Both Dan and Sam are very specific in their terminology and want it used in a certain way so that they can convey particular ideas clearly.

If you feel tenshijin hurting your back I would stop immediately - ask Dan for some pointers if you see him in November...

Best,

Chris

Its not as bad now as when I first began tenshinjin, but coming up from jin with your hands pointing up .... whatta stretch!!! I wish I could attend the seminar but alas I am a broke college student!! I will have to ask Heraldo or Frantz to relay the question.

Perhaps I should have worded it differently. Anyone here cross train in different IS/IP training? If so what incites have you gained from each teaching methodology?

You might want to talk with Robert John, who hasn't posted here in a while, who has studied with Akuzawa, met Mike, met with Sam Chin and one of his guys for a while too.

Can you mix and match exercises? Well I guess you can, but I didn't have much success doing that on my own until I had some guidance mainly because I was doing pretty much all of them wrong even when meeting weekly with someone with jin. I've lately been doing a lot of "stretching" and being able to maintain certain whole body stretches throughout various positions. Figuring out how to bend from the kua rather than the waist, and how to keep the shoulders from floating up without holding them in place muscularly as well as trying not to push back with muscles lower than what the other guy is using (as in doing the exercises more properly than I was) has helped me more than trying to collect exercises.

Oh I wanted to follow up with, that its pretty clear if you watch how each of these guys move they aren't actually doing the exact same thing, but none of them look like how "conventional" people move either.

I've met Mike and trained with the Aunkai. Here are some thoughts on a very high level:

What Mike presents in his seminars is going to be very accessible to get your foot in the door. The Aunkai method will make you strong whether you do it right or wrong, you just want to figure out how to make yourself look like Ark instead of doing what I was doing (going down a road that would never make me move or generate power like Akuzawa sensei). In hindsight, I learned stuff from Mike's seminar, but I had a bunch of fundamental misconceptions in general (not due to Akuzawa's nor Mike's presentations nor guidance) that kept me from applying what I learned from meeting with both.

I'll say this much, whatever approach you go for, or try and combine, you want zero feedback when you touch someone. When I do a partner exercise and I "move" them its like there not there, not because I blasted through them, its literally feels like my opponent is not there. When I can get that, then I assume whatever I was doing with my body was right and I try and recapture that the next time around.

Regarding Aunkai, be careful with the exercises. There are details not explained in the DVDs. Fortunately there are a couple guys in Seattle who hosted Ark in the past and explained some of them to me. If Tenshijin is killing your back I'd be concerned you're doing something wrong - i.e. not stopping at a body limit and letting you're structure stretch and slowly adapt. but I could be mistaken.

I actually pointed this out on aikiweb after watching some aunkai excercises a few years ago. I was surprised no one else did at the time. People are far too casual about these excercises IMO.

I too work both ILC and Dan's Ueshiba Aiki and got introduced to this whole area via purchasing Aunkai DVDs. I'm to much of a newb to really comment on similarities and differences but here goes - not so much as specific methodology, but just things I've recognized.

disclaimer alert - I'm newb so what I write below is probably wrong!

First off in terms of feeling I see a lot of overlap between Sifu Chin and Dan, but now that I'm learning I'm not to surprised by this.

Terminology - you have to be careful cause I think Sam and Dan say the same thing but in different ways and when attending seminars I want to avoid confusing two methodologies. For example Dan talks of opening & closing the body and the exercise is a stretching/removing the slack of the myofascial system to feel the connection to dantien. In ILC I find this to be the Expand & Condense exercise. Whereas in ILC opening & closing refers to the relationship of the wrist/elbow to the shoulder line.

Next for me is my overall martial goal. I've done Japanese weapons work in the past, but its not my thing. I've heard Dan speak to applying the Ueshiba Aiki work to Koryu weapons work. Dan and Sam are both experienced empty hand fighters, but my interest and background in kempo/grappling/boxing make me embrace the ILC system more and you'll find ILC guys going out and competing so working with them adds to the learning ladder for me. From my brief conversation with Dan, he's an MMA guy before there was MMA but most of the local guys practicing his exercises are in Aikido dojos and so the direction is focused there.

Regarding Aunkai, be careful with the exercises. There are details not explained in the DVDs. Fortunately there are a couple guys in Seattle who hosted Ark in the past and explained some of them to me. If Tenshijin is killing your back I'd be concerned you're doing something wrong - i.e. not stopping at a body limit and letting you're structure stretch and slowly adapt. but I could be mistaken.

I haven't attended a Mike Sigman seminar, but don't intend to - my plate is full of good stuff as it is!
my 2 cents worth!

Thanks Ryan! Your explanations are great on comparing the methodology.

You might want to talk with Robert John, who hasn't posted here in a while, who has studied with Akuzawa, met Mike, met with Sam Chin and one of his guys for a while too.

Can you mix and match exercises? Well I guess you can, but I didn't have much success doing that on my own until I had some guidance mainly because I was doing pretty much all of them wrong even when meeting weekly with someone with jin. I've lately been doing a lot of "stretching" and being able to maintain certain whole body stretches throughout various positions. Figuring out how to bend from the kua rather than the waist, and how to keep the shoulders from floating up without holding them in place muscularly as well as trying not to push back with muscles lower than what the other guy is using (as in doing the exercises more properly than I was) has helped me more than trying to collect exercises.

That makes a lot sense. Thank you for the advice. It is hard since there are no regular teachers here. We have seminars but they are on the other islands or I am broke at the time. I try to get info from my dojo mates who attend these seminars.

Perhaps I should have worded it differently. Anyone here cross train in different IS/IP training? If so what incites have you gained from each teaching methodology?

I started working out with guys who had seen Mike, Ark and some CMA guys several times and had been at it for a few years before me. I also went to one of Mike's workshops and saw Toby Threadgill at a seminar.

IMO, they all have the same goal. That is, to build a relaxed, connected body that moves from the center and draws strength from the ground, gravity and intent. They all have different methodologies, terminology, exercises and tactical perspectives to get you to build that conditioning into your body and then use/maintain it in motion. One may focus more or less on one aspect or stress one aspect over another at the early levels, but again, I think the similarities outweigh the differences and once you start feeling some of those things in your body that becomes pretty obvious, but the trick is really putting in the time to get that foot in the door so you're feeling these things on your own and not just doing exercises.

I was initially shown some basic jin stuff that came from Mike, a bunch of aunkai exercises and some CMA things. I alternated between then regularly, but never felt like I was getting anywhere, never really felt anything different in me. It was a little frustrating, but I was eventually advised to just focus on one thing, so I focused on basic jin and worked it pretty consistently for several weeks until I started noticing my body reacting differently to these forces and it just felt different. I still continued to work on that one aspect for a good while, but eventually started adding in things that were obviously different from what I was doing. Things that focused on that relaxed connection in me and I did those things pretty heavily, in addition to the previous stuff, until I could feel that aspect consistently too. Now I go back and look at those aunkai exercises or some of the cma stuff and it makes sense to me now. I see the point and can do them and feel a lot of the things that I was instructed to try and feel while doing them before. I still have aspects that I haven't incorporated heavily yet and haven't focused on and still loads of progress to make on the conditioning side of things across the board, but I'm enjoying the work and the progress and will continue to get out and see anyone I can.

That progression has worked for me, but I think it's different for everyone. That's why some people like one method over another. Our bodies don't always speak the same language and one persons descriptions for your bodies feelings may not mesh with how you describe them to yourself. So I think it's a good idea to see as many people as you can until something clicks for you, but also pick things to focus on and work on them consistently and don't jump between this or that waiting for something to happen. Once you start feeling things yourself, go get with people who are better than you and get some confirmation on that and just keep working.

IMO, they all have the same goal. That is, to build a relaxed, connected body that moves from the center and draws strength from the ground, gravity and intent. They all have different methodologies, terminology, exercises and tactical perspectives to get you to build that conditioning into your body and then use/maintain it in motion. One may focus more or less on one aspect or stress one aspect over another at the early levels, but again, I think the similarities outweigh the differences and once you start feeling some of those things in your body that becomes pretty obvious, but the trick is really putting in the time to get that foot in the door so you're feeling these things on your own and not just doing exercises.

i was going to say similar, but since you stated better and i am too lazy to write, so i said "me three". it really comes down to the mixing amount of beans and kimchi. some wants more beans; others, more kimchi. some might want to add cinamon and nutmeg for ki flavoring, but the core ingredients are still the same. incidentiallly, it's lunch time and i got left-over hambone bean soup with 15 different kind of beans. wonder if a side of kimchi goes well with the soup. wonder if i need to be away from anything flamable. wonder if i need to be outdoor. wish me luck!

ps. folks who have no understanding of ki, has no understanding of IS/IP, nor do they understand the value of aiiieeeki.

I alternated between then regularly, but never felt like I was getting anywhere, never really felt anything different in me. It was a little frustrating, but I was eventually advised to just focus on one thing

yes, in relation to this topic i had posted on Jamie's Facebook page;

Quote:

I just told one of my students in class tonight that it's fine to look outside of our system and get an idea of what other people are doing, but you have to look at our stuff as 'education' and the other stuff as 'entertainment'. In other words, entertainment is not something you bother to really retain.
of course, all the arts are trying to get you up to the mountain top, but by different paths. I think it's better to get to the top along one path first, or at least far enough along that you can see the peak before exploring another entirely different path(s). You spend all your time running around at the base of the mountain, running from path to path.

Just to be clear, when I have say 'entertainment' I don't mean to devalue any other art, just that while you're on any given path, spending lots of time looking at all the others can be a distraction to say the least.

I have had the good fortune to train a little bit with Mike Sigman (at one of his Seminars and a couple of days of personal instruction), Sam Chin (at his Seminar and with his father Grandmaster Chin in Malaysia), Seichiro Endo (at various Seminars and he will be giving a Seminar with us in HK next year), as well as a number of Yiquan and Baguazhang teachers in Hong Kong in addition to my primary teacher. Some of these experiences are detailed on my Blog

A few caveats:
(1) You need a bit of exposure to IS/IP to be able to feel and understand the differences (everyone is going to throw you around and you will think they are all powerful). Ignore the guys who say he touched me and I fell down like magic. It is a matter of training your sensitivity, even if you can't do what the master is doing, you should be able to feel that he is doing something to you, and then eventually piece together what happened.
(2) Your definition of what constitutes IS/IP also matters, I have tried to be as agnostic as I can in the following description
(3) All the above are effective when trained to high level, but some methods de-emphasize or emphasize certain aspects, so the question who is better in a fight is not really relevant as all these people can still kick my ass.

Here is my personal opinion on the strengths of each

Mike Sigman - has a comprehensive theoretical model based on Jin,Qi and Suit which has impressive explanatory power. Most of his model is based of off Taiji (mainly Chen taiji) and Chinese internal martial arts classical theory. His exercises will help train the body structure and development of the dantian / tanden, but necessarily take a long period of time to show results. Also he does not teach applications - he is trying to show how to generate a certain kind of power through the use of the dantian - and this "engine" can then be retrofitted into whichever car / style you are driving

I Liq Chuan - a "family" style with strong Yiquan and Taiji influence (and an overlaying of Buddhist meditation techniques). Has a detailed system, and also a systematic method of training which will allow you to control your opponent in spinning hands (his version of push hands) or sparring and developing a good internal sense of balance and control. Good results in a short time. Less emphasis on training "structure" (although he does have some standing post exercises) and little mention of dantian power.

Seishiro Endo - a soft form of Aikido with and emphasis on relaxation and "connection" - the emphasis is on controlling your opponent through forging a connection with the opponent and also executing the technique with the least resistance and effort. Good training for sensitivity and "reading your opponent" to feel where the "holes" are and also to train relaxation of the body and how to use you strength in the most ergonomically efficient way. No emphasis on training the body through solo exercises (although there are glimpses on some of his DVDs and in personal conversation with him that he might actually do this himself) and issuing power or fajin and use of tanden is completely absent.

Yiquan - good training for building a strong body structure that is relaxed but does not collapse and can transmit power efficiently. Good for health and an indeed at higher levels for building a blow-resistant body. Indeed many of its standing post exercises have been co-opted by other arts such as Taiji, I Liq Chuan, etc. However the quality of the instruction is hugely variable, many teachers do not teach applications or know how to fight, and there is some controversy as to whether it uses the dantian.

For baguazhang and Taiji the quality of instruction ranges so widely that its not meaningful to comment.

Hi Bernard,
I got the impression that I Liq Chuan puts quite a bit of emphasis on structure training, and although dantien is not mentioned often, it is very much a part of the system's process, as is the unification of opposing spiral forces within the body. In my observation (and Ashe Higgs will correct me here if I'm wrong), these are all considered foundational and fundamental, and it is expected that they will be incorporated in every training exercise, from beginning to advanced levels.

I was afraid of this, I was trying my best not to step on any toes with my descriptions. But most of the posts didn't seem to give any meaningful comparisons.

I didn't deny that there is some structure training (but we are talking about relative emphasis here as compared to Yiquan). As for dantian, this like Qi is a sensitive topic, which involves a clear set of definitions before a fruitful discussion is possible so I would prefer not go down that road in this post. It is very easy to say that my art is the best art and has everything but I am doing my best to provide what I see as genuine comparison

I Liq Chuan is an effective system, and I respect Sam Chin for what he is trying to achieve in disseminating his art and was really happy that he made a time to see me when I visited Malaysia.

Hm, I wonder from what experiences your impression of Endo senseis aikido come from? My experiences are different.
His teaching is not about being soft. But about how to become soft and how to be able to stay soft. It was his aikidō that led me into internals.

Bernard, I'm glad you had such a positive experience with my Sifu, but your description of I Liq Chuan is quite flawed. I don't have enough time to address each point by point, but Dan Tien is fundamental, and there is no Taiji or Yiquan influence. This comes up a lot, but there's no direct connection.

Okay, I have a few minutes to expand on my previous post. I'm not sure of the content of what you experienced during the workshop you attended, but we 'build the frame' in our 15 basic exercises and during some variations of partner training. We generally refer to it as balancing or harmonizing the body / 13 points. Dan tien is only half the equation, the Ming men is the other. You have to use both Yin and Yang.